Yes, in the latest mickeymouse move from the Republican National Committee, they have voted to ban NBC and CNN from taking part in any 2016 Republican primary debates.

Which -- to me at least -- is a lot like telling a man who's just crawled out of the Gobi desert on hands and knees that he cannot have a peanut butter sandwich.

This is, as you know, "punishment" for NBC and CNN deciding to produce a Hillary TV-movie and documentary, respectively.

Now frankly, I'm not so sure I disagree with chairman Reince Priebus' position, that these programs might give the appearance of bias to the two networks. I know Hillary's not officially a candidate yet, but I also know that if I read that Fox was doing "The Marco Rubio Story", I'd think that was a little biased.

I guess what bugs me most about this tactic of the RNC is not its bullying nature (although there is that), it's the hypocrisy...especially since Priebus himself has suggested the idea of Republican debates hosted by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin.

I mean...really? Hey, if anyone runs against Hillary, can we have the Democratic primary debates hosted by Keith Olbermann, Arianna Huffington or Markos Moulitsas?

But... but... but... I thought the Republicans were adamant about their Constitutional rights? Apparently that's only the 2nd amendment.. and they couldn't care less about the 1st.

Now they're trying to blackmail news networks to prevent them from broadcasting what they want?

These morons live in a fantasy world.

Click to expand...

Republicans love the constitution! This is why my republican friends have been posting the image below on Facebook. Obviously their vast intelligence doesn't allow them to see the glaring problem with this quote...(not sure if its an actual quote but its the picture going around).

Republicans love the constitution! This is why my republican friends have been posting the image below on Facebook. Obviously their vast intelligence doesn't allow them to see the glaring problem with this quote...(not sure if its an actual quote but its the picture going around).

Click to expand...

You know they've sunk pretty low when they've resorted to getting their ill-informed point across by quoting a B-list actor who's only relevant now because of an internet meme.

What is more disturbing is how hard the GOP is making voting in NC. Voter disfranchising seems to be part of their M.O once again.

Click to expand...

Don't forget that the Democrats engineered Jim Crow voter disenfranchisement throughout the South, as they were the pro-segregation party and (still are) the pro-slavery party.

And don't buy the NPR argument that requiring a drivers license or other state-issued ID to vote disenfranchises blacks. That's just so insultingly racist - as if we're somehow less able to get driver's licenses or other state-issued IDs because we're black. I mean come on, how condescendingly elitist can you be while simultaneously waving a "progressive" flag?

This might just be the most stupid and uninformed thing I've read here for months. Apart from the similarities in their genitalia, how exactly are the two alike?

Click to expand...

They're both empty suits adopted by their respective parties to appeal to their female bases, one "blue-collar-traditional" and one "intellectual-progressive." Two different flavors admittedly, but the ice cream's the same.

Huh, sounds like the progressives after Citizens United Vs. The Federal Elections Commission. You know, when Citizens United wanted to run ads for their movie Hillery: The Movie.

SSSOOOO funny watching the liberals get their panties in a bunch over this.

Then again, they don't stand for anything otherwise they would be marching on CNN/NBC for supporting a political candidate outside of campaign finance laws like they make a big dead out of the Koch brothers/ect.

The Progressive - Political boycotts are OK as long as your boycott is on our approved boycott list.
The Progressive - It is only free speech if your speech is on our approved free speech list.

Don't forget that the Democrats engineered Jim Crow voter disenfranchisement throughout the South, as they were the pro-segregation party and (still are) the pro-slavery party.

And don't buy the NPR argument that requiring a drivers license or other state-issued ID to vote disenfranchises blacks. That's just so insultingly racist - as if we're somehow less able to get driver's licenses or other state-issued IDs because we're black. I mean come on, how condescendingly elitist can you be while simultaneously waving a "progressive" flag?

Click to expand...

There is way more too it than that. You should Google what's happening in NC right now. I'm typing from phone, otherwise I would provide link myself.

Educate yourself here, especially on how this strategy put Nixon in office and how the modern-day republicans seem to still have a vast amount of butthurt over civil rights.

Quote

And don't buy the NPR argument that requiring a drivers license or other state-issued ID to vote disenfranchises blacks. That's just so insultingly racist - as if we're somehow less able to get driver's licenses or other state-issued IDs because we're black. I mean come on, how condescendingly elitist can you be while simultaneously waving a "progressive" flag?

Click to expand...

You never did answer the question of invalids or those not physically able to go to an official office to get an official ID. Yet they are citizens of the country and have a right to vote. How do you expect them to vote if they can't get an ID?

You take your mobility way too much for granted. And who said this had anything to do with NPR?

Since when is believing in the limitation of government power as proscribed in the Constitution an ill-informed point?

>

Click to expand...

If it wasn't a living document then there wouldn't have been new amendments added to it to change a previous amendment, set new powers/limits on government, or guarantee rights of people. If it was a set in stone document, what was stated in the constitution when it was first past would be it. There would be no 13th, 14th, 15th, etc amendment. Women couldn't vote. There wouldn't be a two term limit on Presidents, etc.

Don't forget that the Democrats engineered Jim Crow voter disenfranchisement throughout the South, as they were the pro-segregation party and (still are) the pro-slavery party.

Click to expand...

Let me guess. You think that all taxes are "slavery"? Skip the Libertarian Religion lessons please. You know, in Somalia, with a few crates of AK-47 clones and a ton of ammunition, you, too, can avoid ever paying any taxes again. Sound attractive? I didn't think so. But, note that Federal taxation is a key element of the U.S. Constitution, and, one of the reasons why it replaced the Articles of Confederation.

I think everyone here knows that between 1960 and 1980, the parties realigned, just as Lyndon Johnson knew they would after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed:

And don't buy the NPR argument that requiring a drivers license or other state-issued ID to vote disenfranchises blacks.

Click to expand...

OK, admit it -- you do listen to NPR!! I listened to that same discussion on All Things Considered on my way home from work.

Quote

That's just so insultingly racist - as if we're somehow less able to get driver's licenses or other state-issued IDs because we're black. I mean come on, how condescendingly elitist can you be while simultaneously waving a "progressive" flag?

What you have is a large group of elderly, poor black citizens, whose identity and citizenship is clear, who are registered to vote, and who are not very mobile, most without cars. You think it is "elitist" to assume that an elderly population like that needs help to either vote early or vote on election day? Guess what-- you may be old someday yourself.

The recent law was designed to make it harder for that particular demographic to vote, and, it will. And we know these laws were designed that way on purpose -- the Republicans who wrote these laws in several states bragged about it.

Quote

They're both empty suits adopted by their respective parties to appeal to their female bases, one "blue-collar-traditional" and one "intellectual-progressive." Two different flavors admittedly, but the ice cream's the same.

Click to expand...

I have to wonder whether Clinton has the stamina for the job -- look at the way her last few months in office played out. But, she certainly isn't an "empty suit".

Sarah Palin is just an entertainer who missed her true calling. She should have become a comedian and appeared on shows like SNL.

Other legislation on the table in North Carolina are bills that would levy a tax penalty on parents whose children register to vote where they attend college, cut early voting  which 70 percent of black voters in the state use  and one that would create the harshest felony disenfranchisement law in the nation.

Educate yourself here, especially on how this strategy put Nixon in office and how the modern-day republicans seem to still have a vast amount of butthurt over civil rights.

Click to expand...

I grew up in the Democratic South of the early 1970s, I know the history because I lived it, as did my parents and my grandparents, etc. My state's senator was Jesse Helms, and I know that Jesse Helms was a much bigger supporter of the black businesses in my community than any of the Democrats who had just a few short years earlier held rallies in white robes to burn them down. I also know that he was the only member of Congress to give James Meridith and opportunity to work on The Hill; none of the Democrats would.

Southern racial and political history is much more complicated and nuanced than you will understand from a few Wikipedia articles.

As to the modern stances of the Republican and Democratic Parties, while neither is truly a defender of my liberty, I find that my freedom is under FAR greater threat from the political stance of the Democratic Party than it is from the Republicans, which is not really all that different from the historical tendencies of the two parties. Just as the old Republican Party was basically formed to uphold the political conviction to free my ancestors from Plantation Slavery, so to the modern Republican Party - or at least the libertarian remnant that has remained uncorrupted by the Neo-Cons (who were originally Democrats) - is the last bastion of the political conviction to free me from Large Centralized Government Slavery.

Quote

You never did answer the question of invalids or those not physically able to go to an official office to get an official ID. Yet they are citizens of the country and have a right to vote. How do you expect them to vote if they can't get an ID?

You take your mobility way too much for granted. And who said this had anything to do with NPR?

BL.

Click to expand...

The question was never posed to me. But just as I would never (condescendingly) assume that people of any ethnicity would be particularly incapable of obtaining state-issued ID, I would accord the same basic respect to those with physical disabilities.

The idea that there are legions of CITIZENS who are incapable of obtaining state-issued IDs is patently ridiculous and an obvious red-herring for some other agenda.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.